Regarding the road improvement works (RIW) at Kennedy Road to be undertaken in connection with the development of Hopewell Centre II, I received strong objection from the residents of Kennedy Road, especially to those living in Wing Fook Court (68 Kennedy Road) and Camelot Heights (66 Kennedy Road).
I thereby wrote to all Executive Council Members to object the aforementioned RIW under section 10 of the Roads (Works, Use and Compensation) Ordinance, Cap 370.
The content of the letter is as follows:
4 March 2010
The Honourable Donald TSANG, GBM
President,
Executive Council
Executive Council Secretariat
1/F Main Wing, Central Government Offices
18 Lower Albert Road, Hong Kong
Objection under section 10 of the Roads (Works, Use and
Compensation) Ordinance, Cap 370
I am writing to lodge an objection to the road improvement works (RIW) at Kennedy Road to be undertaken in connection with the development of Hopewell Centre II.
I wish to declare my interest as a resident on Bowen Road, who makes daily use of Kennedy Road, and have many friends who live on Kennedy Road affected by the road works in question.
In November 2008, the Secretary for Development, Mrs. Carrie Lam, and Hopewell Development announced a plan to downscale Hopewell Center II. Under the revised plan, the total number of floors will be reduced to 55; the number of hotel rooms will be cut back from 2197 to 1024, and the plot ratio reduced from 15.9 to 10.3. I am glad that the developer has taken heed of public views and the downsizing is welcome.
Nevertheless, lingering questions concerning the RIW with tunnel and flyover access to the hotel entrance on Kennedy Road proposed by the developer (see map attached) continue to generate serious public concern. The first question is, given that the proposed RIW are solely built for the convenience and traffic needs of Hopewell Centre II and for the sole benefit of the developer (only cars with access to and exit out of the hotel will use the tunnel and flyover), why should the costs of the RIW be borne by the government (i.e. the taxpayers) and not the developer?
In addition, such works will cause serious disruptions and inconvenience to the residents of Kennedy Road, especially to those living in Wing Fook Court (68 Kennedy Road) and Camelot Heights (66 Kennedy Road). I wish to draw your attention in particular to the following potential adverse consequences:
1. At present, the residents of the two buildings mentioned above use the safety island in front of the Kennedy Road exit of Hopewell Centre to go home. When the proposed tunnel and flyover are constructed, the safety island will be eliminated. Residents will need to walk a longer distance alongside fumes emitted by passing vehicles on the flyover. They will go home by a longer, less healthy, more dangerous and indirect route. The developer’s contention that the new route is shorter is simply not true.
2. Older and handicapped people are among residents of the two buildings. On completion of the RIW, they will have to go home after walking along the flyover and taking an elevator. For going out to take a taxi or other public transport, they will also have to take the elevator to go to street level. They won’t be able to get in or out of their homes if the elevator breaks down.
3. The proposed tunnel and flyover interfere with the existing public footpath along the north side of Kennedy Road. It also takes away the access right (right of way) which has been granted to Wing Fook Court since 1926. This right should not be taken away.
4. The arrangements for the proposed tunnel and flyover are highly undesirable from a public safety point of view. The arrangements indicate that a steep downward ramp from the flyover will have to merge with the upward westbound lane in Kennedy Road in a 90 degree bend. It is likely that this area will become a dangerous blind spot susceptible to serious accidents. Such works cannot be considered an improvement to resolve road traffic problems on Kennedy Road, but rather an ill-conceived aggravation for the benefit of private developers and at the expense of local residents.
5. Neither Transport Department nor Highways Department has advised residents of the two buildings clearly of the adverse impact of such works on traffic in and out of the two buildings. The basic rights of the residents have been ignored by these two departments.
6. At present, fire engines can park on Kennedy Road. If the tunnel and flyover are built in front of the two buildings, fire engines will have to be parked on the flyover in case of fire. It is questionable whether such an arrangement is in line with fire regulations which say that fire engines ought to be no further than 30m from the fire. The safety of the residents will likely be seriously compromised. During a public meeting with the residents, Fire Services Department admitted that no assessment for the residents of the two buildings had been made before they agreed to advance the RIW to gazettal stage.
Hopewell Centre II is a conference hotel, which might create late night and early morning traffic, noise and other related nuisances. The traffic will include prohibited vehicles, such as large tour buses, rubbish collection trucks and other goods lorries. Again all these are potentially dangerous and could generate a lot of inconvenience, nuisance and disturbance to Kennedy Road residents.
Furthermore, the traffic on Kennedy Road and the junction of Queen’s Road East and Kennedy Road, as well as eastbound and westbound, are already near to full capacity at present, with long queues during peak hours and school hours. The proposed tunnel and flyover are solely for access into and exit from the Hopewell Hotel. Serious questions must be raised as to why the interests of so many residents and users of Kennedy Road must be sacrificed in the interest of one developer.
Local residents and Wanchai District Councillor Peggy Lee had met with representatives of different government departments and the developer many times, and pleaded with them to have the necessary works constructed within the developer’s site. They also queried whether it would be necessary to have these RIW when the hotel will be downsized by 40%. However, their representations had drawn a blank response.
I must add that the local residents are not being unreasonable. Residents of the Phoenix Court have muted their objections after the downsizing of the hotel. Residents of Wing Fook Court and Camelot Heights are continuing to object because their daily lives, safety and traffic convenience will be seriously affected.
I wish to stress that I am not opposed to Hopewell’s development, but a win-win formula must be found if the interests of local residents are not to be sacrificed for the benefit of developers.
I appeal to you, Sir, to take these objections and residents’ concerns seriously into account in reviewing the RIW in question.
I thank you sincerely for your attention.
Sincerely,
Regina Ip lau Suk Yee (Mrs.)
c.c. Miss Peggy Lee, Wanchai District Councillor
<Download the Letter>
